Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 19 - Shortest Court Day, EVER

[Frigga]

Survivor!

But who will survive the longest? The defense team? Prosecution? Defendant? Trial watchers? The judge? The Media now relegated to tweeters?

Hmmm- who will it be? LOL.

 

[hindsight2020]

Not sure what is happening tomorrow. Do I make a new thread, or not? If I do, what should I call it? :findinglink:

Possible 4pm Telephone Status Conference - Day 20

 

[Renee110]

[/B]

BBM- But I believe this will only incite the jury to resolve to see this through to the bitter end. These jurors are no different then all of us here. I believe this tactic (to lose jurors) will only backfire and help these jurors to dig in and stay the course. The image of the young man, blue and stiff splayed out in every position on a metal table- naked - with slashes, cuts, deep stab wounds and bruises has got to be seared into their minds- permanently. A young man decaying with a gunshot wound to his head, along with a story of the inability to determine the exact path of that bullet because his brain had turned to mush- was actually close to liquid. How can these jurors ever forget that? Pictures of a bloody and gory crime scene will probably never. leave. their . thoughts. fully. Just like they have not left ours.

These jurors have been subjected to ridiculous and fully inadequate scenarios to explain away the things they have seen.

They have also seen day after day- a living, breathing woman who walked away from all that terror with only a cut on her finger.

These motions will take time- apparently- as will the Supreme Court ruling... but I have faith that these jurors are not going anywhere.

The trial will resume and it will conclude.

There will be a sentence handed down by these jurors (we still have 3 extra- that's a lot) and the finish line is in sight.

We must do what we can to rally our strength and faith- I have more stamina in one foot then that has in her entire self along with the arsenal of manipulations that take place in her brain. Good will win this time... she is going down... going to prison. Only the when and the to what end remain to be seen. She will be outsmarted, ouplayed and outlasted because she is a brutal killer with not one shred of potential for rehabilitation and not much else in that ridiculous, delusional, self centered pea brain of hers. Godspeed the prosecution in their duties.

Respectfully BBM:

There is a HUGE difference. Our lives aren't on hold. We aren't losing income. These jurors are not invested in this trial, and I doubt that all of these jurors are wealthy and able to coast along for months and months. I would be trying to get out of this as hard as I could, and it wouldn't have anything to do with Travis, or Jodi… it would be because I have bills to pay and a life to try to live. I feel so sorry for these jurors.

3 "extra" jurors are not that many, especially considering we lost two the first week. If there were ten extra jurors I doubt that would be enough to see this through. I am so disappointed in the judge in this case. She is obviously out of her league here. She did not have the experience to be involved with a case of this magnitude. Floundering and struggling and its just getting worse. JMO of course… and worth nothing to anyone but me.

 

[Sulamith]

:seeya: Some suggestions for the new thread while we :waiting: for CMJA and the DT to advise JSS when they are ready to resume the Re-Trial:

- While We Wait on Nurmi's Motions to Be Heard Thread

- [I]Welcome to My Nightmare Thread[/I]

- We are in the Twilight Zone Thread

- The Indefinite Suspension of the Re-Trial Thread

:dunno: just trying to help out ...

:seeya:

BBM Or maybe Welcome to the Jungle??

 

[Val1]

Steve was just a made up person conjured up to make Travis jealous and to be her fall man when Travis was onto her.

Hmm, although I'm well aware that much of her journals are works of fiction, on p.2 May 18, 2008, of her last one, right after saying her Helio phone had been stolen(the one that the sex tapes were retrieved from) and how inconvenient that was.... she does say:

"I notified a few people, namely Ryan, Steve, and Sam via email/myspace."

So either he does exist, though perhaps not in the capacity that she presented him to TA, or the doctoring of her journals was even deeper than I suspect. :/

 

[NashBridges2]

Or "the super secret thread". It's so secret, we don't even know we are posting in it.

 

[RR0004]

I could go for Pseudo?

Lol "Pseudo Thread"...kinda like a real thread, but maybe not

 

[Val1]

Can she describe the man? Black? White? Brown? Tall? Short? Fat? Thin? Beard? Large mole on forehead? Come on, BK, give us something to work with! <big snip>

Shhh... I just heard her say that he was of slight build, balding with a beard....thirties-forties. That help?

 

[LaLaw2000]

Yes, with JSS being the judge. She is competent. I don't like all the comparisons to how much better a judge that Judge Perry was, because in the end, he wasn't.

Opinions differ so we will agree to disagree. It is my opinion that JSS was/is not up to par for this particular trial. I compare when I see polar opposites as are these two mentioned judges and I have seen both in action. I will say again; Judge Perry would not have stood for all this time wasting and delays. Court would have gone on and he would have been mindful of the tax dollars dwindling away as delay after delay is given.

Love you and agree with you most of the time. Just not on JSS!

MOO

 

[bznbear]

IMO 'Pseudonym' did something hinky with/under Neumeister's direction......now Neumeister is back tracking to get himself out of the MESS....tampering with evidence. He thought Juan could not figure it out with his limited knowledge of computers.

Nuemeister: "hey, I'm only an audio guy"

:liar::behindbaranic::gasp:

It was obvious BN was no computer guru, especially as relates to forensics. And I believe something potentially unethical or at least incompetent was done by BN et al. Yes now he knows nothing and wants to throw pseudo under the bus. Somebody's hands are dirty here imo.

 

[bznbear]

It sure smells like it, which would account for this so called 'computer expert' wanting to remain unidentified. If he, indeed, does have a forensic company, fiddling with evidence won't look too good on his web page!

Interesting that BN seemed to have lost his belligerence toward Juan in those private interviews.

Yes along with all his vast knowledge.

 

[Shadowboy]

From AZ Lawyer:

3) Sue D. Nimh works for some company/agency that does not permit him to freelance and will fire him if they find out?

From Shadowboy: Yep. That's my take.

 

[ElleElle]

Or "the super secret thread". It's so secret, we don't even know we are posting in it.

:laughing:

 

[Boytwnmom]

My first thought was this line of evidence, argument, whatever, about the computer, was entirely improper at the sentencing phase, as that matter had been part of the guilt phase which had been finally adjudicated. I am admittedly no criminal procedure expert so not sure that is correct. But my premise was that the evidence presented at the guilt phase has to be accepted as that phase has had a final judgment. Challenging any aspect of the guilt phase is simply something to be pursued on appeal. So, I also felt that any issues about, essentially, the credibility of the computer evidence would be an issue for appeal. At the guilt phase both sides even agreed regarding the computer contents (not that it really matters for this purpose). And then the DT argued prosecutorial misconduct, which, to me, would normally still be an appeal issue as that is a common argument for overturning a conviction.

The argument about whether was on the computer in any form has always seemed somewhat tenuous to me, but, sure, mitigation is broad and apparently basically anything can be presented. So, I am assuming the argument is that, if somehow the state deleted, hid etc the computer evidence of, what, just , or child (are either mitigating here or just child-arguably, anything could be deleted by the state but not anything deleted would be actionable and deserving of any kind of hearing.

So, is the DT only arguing that if the state deleted child THAT would be mitigating? I still don't feel I have a firm grasp on their precise argument. In other words, what if there was "prosecutorial misconduct", (NOT that there was) as argued by the DT (someone from the state somehow deleted something), but what if what was deleted was just some, "regular, normal" ? One, is that even "misconduct" if the material is not Brady? Or, if the DT argued it was Brady as to guilt, perhaps using the argument that the defendants credibility was impacted by the elimination of the she knew he viewed or something. To me, that is also just an appeal issue that can't be in any way viewed as "mitigating" otherwise any defendant could attack the guilt phase proceedings during sentencing and argue, for example, various rulings by the Judge were wrong, certain evidence should have or should not have been admitted, etc. There would seem to be a distinction and a difference between "exculpatory" and "mitigating". But maybe I'm wrong.

To me, the only possible mitigating evidence here is child (and, honestly, I don't really agree it is "mitigating" in the way I assume the legislature intended-but that's a different argument) and, to me, it can only be introduced if, in fact, it is also proven that there was prosecutorial misconduct. If there was no misconduct, but there was child , that was just not found for some reason, that would just be something for appeal and it should not be allowed to be introduced.

I guess I am just trying to see what the "game" and the "end game" here are. Just what does the DT need to prove? And, just how far into the weeds does JSS have to let the DT go to try and prove both misconduct and the existence of something exculpatory? Or what if it isn't exculpatory, but just arguably "mitigating"? Is that also the same prosecutorial misconduct? I have often wondered why JM has not argued that this whole line of inquiry is improper. I assume it's because it isn't, at least on some level. But what is that exact level?

Is this like the typical Brady material case where it has to be shown that the state failed to turn over something that was relevant and exculpatory? Is "mitigating" treated the same as "exculpatory"? Does the state have an affirmative obligation to turn over "mitigating" evidence? Because this portion of the trial is only about mitigation.

Maybe I am just missng something. But I just keep thinking that this (but not ONLY this) part of the trial makes little sense in a procedural sense and that we are essentially arguing about issues properly argued on appeal.

It's late here on the east coast so not sure that even made any sense. But hopefully you perhaps caught my drift in some way. Love to hear your thoughts as I am sorely perplexed by this particular sideshow.

It has nothing to do with her state of mind. If there was child accessed on the computer, it would tend to corroborate JA's testimony that TA was looking at a picture of child , which in theory would tend to corroborate JA's testimony that her discovery of this fact caused their relationship to go into a downward spiral of physical abuse and ever-kinkier sex, which in theory mixed with JA's already-crazy brain chemistry to make her unable to see that murder was not the answer.

 

[Sulamith]

Or "the super secret thread". It's so secret, we don't even know we are posting in it.

Not secret, just sacred.

 

[RR0004]

So, I just finished the State's motion to preclude Mr. Pseudo's testimony. It was mentioned that there was a 7000 page report that these computer geniuses prepared??!! This is getting more and more absurd.

 

[AZlawyer]

Shhh... I just heard her say that he was of slight build, balding with a beard....thirties-forties. That help?

From AZ Lawyer:

3) Sue D. Nimh works for some company/agency that does not permit him to freelance and will fire him if they find out?

From Shadowboy: Yep. That's my take.

Like the FBI maybe. Based on that description I can think of one potential candidate. I'm probably wrong, so I'll just give the initials of DH so I don't implicate the innocent.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Some more names for tomorrow's thread ... and the day after tomorrow ... and the day after that:


- Who Knows How Long We'll Be In Limbo Thread

:gaah: Weeks ... Months ... Years !


- The PseudoMeister Thread

:gaah: A Mystery Witness and now a Pseudo Witness !


- Keep Calm ... Remain Calm ... Please Remain Calm Thread

I keep thinking of that scene at the end of Animal House when the security guy was yelling at everyone to Remain Calm -- when the frat boys were crashing the parade ... lol !


:seeya: I know ... I'm losing it ... lol !

 

[dog.gone.cute]

"Possible" Court Day, But Most Likely Not

Possible 4pm Telephone Status Conference - Day 20

BBM Or maybe Welcome to the Jungle??

Or "the super secret thread". It's so secret, we don't even know we are posting in it.

Lol "Pseudo Thread"...kinda like a real thread, but maybe not

:hilarious: :hilarious:

:seeya: Y'all keep 'em coming !

 

[Tulessa]

Survivor!

But who will survive the longest? The defense team? Prosecution? Defendant? Trial watchers? The judge? The Media now relegated to tweeters?

Hmmm- who will it be? LOL.

Naked and afraid! :floorlaugh: